Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23263241›Full record

Trial reportHerz2013

Aortic elastic properties : effects of carvedilol versus nebivolol.

M R Sayin, M Aydin, S M Dogan, T Karabag, M A Cetiner, Z Aktop

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Herz, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact, top 99% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Nebivolol for the Treatment of Essential Systemic Arterial Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions · 2021
    Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

M R SayinDepartment of Cardiology, Bülent Ecevit University, Zonguldak, Turkey. sayinmr@mynet.com
M Aydin
S M Dogan
T Karabag
M A Cetiner
Z Aktop
Bülent Ecevit University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this study was to compare the effects of the new generation β-blocker anti-hypertensive drugs carvedilol and nebivolol on aortic elastic properties which are important indicators of hypertension-related morbidity and mortality.

methodsA total of 50 patients who had been diagnosed with stage 1 hypertension according to the Joint National Committee (JNC) VII criteria and who had not received any anti-hypertensive treatment were enrolled in this study. Patients were randomized to receive either 25 mg/day carvedilol (n=25) or 5 mg/day nebivolol (n=25) for 3 months at the beginning of the study. Three patients (1 in the carvedilol group, 2 in the nebivolol group) who did not attend 3 month follow-up measurements were excluded from the study. The study was completed with 47 patients (25 women; mean age: 49 ± 9 years). The aortic elastic parameters such as aortic strain (AS), aortic distensibility (AD), and aortic stiffness index (ASI) were measured by echocardiography.

resultsCarvedilol and nebivolol provided a similar decline in both systolic and diastolic blood pressures (-12/-7 mmHg, p<0.0001 and -12/-7 mmHg, p=0.002, respectively). Both carvedilol and nebivolol induced a significant decrease in heart rate (-15 bpm, p<0.0001, -17 bpm, p<0.0001, respectively). Even though the heart rate at the end of the treatment was lower for the nebivolol group, the rate of decrease of heart rates between carvedilol and nebivolol groups was not statistically significant (p=0.074). Both groups demonstrated improvements in the diastolic functions of the left ventricle where certain values showed more improvement for the nebivolol group. Both groups showed improvements in AS and AD rates compared to basal rates; however, these improvements were not statistically significant. Although the improvement rates in AS, AD, and ASI were higher in the nebivolol group compared to the carvedilol group, the differences were not statistically significant (p=0.091, p=0.095, p=0.259, respectively).

conclusionBoth carvedilol and nebivolol induced a decrease in blood pressure and heart rate and showed an improvement in left ventricular diastolic functions. It was observed that both drugs did not cause deterioration in the aortic elastic properties but a slight improvement was seen. However, this improvement was not statistically significant. The improvement was more explicit in the nebivolol group. It may be concluded that nebivolol is slightly superior to carvedilol in reducing heart rate and improving left ventricular diastolic functions. However, further long-term studies with larger sample sizes should be performed in order to better define the effects of both drugs.

Indexed as

Antihypertensive AgentsAortaBenzopyransBlood PressureCarbazolesCarvedilolElasticity Imaging TechniquesElastic ModulusEthanolaminesFemaleHeart RateHumansHypertensionMaleMiddle AgedNebivololAntihypertensive AgentsBenzopyransCarbazolesCarvedilolEthanolaminesNebivololPropanolaminesVasodilator Agents

Identifiers

PMID23263241
OpenAlexW130190754

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.